Reframing Women’s Issues & Intersectional Identity Frames

• In Event: Effective Campaigns

Abstract

Although considerable changes occurred over the previous century to advance the rights and protections of women, women remain a marginalized group in the United States, and thus there remains a demand for political groups to pursue policy agendas to address women’s issues. However, which issues gain political support and whom do these issues represent? This paper provides a public opinion answer to this question by focusing on how the framing of women’s issues can affect women’s public opinion towards gendered policies. In particular, this study focuses on how frames that vary race and class have different effects on women’s support for these policies, and the political organizations that advocate for them.

Although previous empirical work has confirmed there are recognizable differences among women across race, ethnicity, and class in women’s political preferences and public opinions (Gay & Tate, 1998; Hancock, 2007; Rossi, 1985), few studies have examined how the framing of policy issues can affect public opinion among women differently based on these intersectional identities. Intersectionality is a theoretical concept that captures how one’s multiplicity of social identities determines one’s position of power, life experiences, and political interests (Cohen, 1999; Collins, 1998; Crenshaw, 1997). The framing of political issues can affect women differently based on their intersectional identities. Strolovitch (2006) found that organizations with a commitment to racially and economically marginalized groups, framed issues that affected these marginalized groups as less important compared to issues that affected more advantaged groups. This paper builds off her scholarship by examining the effects of these types of political frames on women’s public opinion, which her work currently does not address.

Although we know policy support can vary by framing (Winter, 2008; Chong & Druckman, 2007) we know very little about the effects of intersectional identity framing on women’s political attitudes. Therefore, this study and paper can provide substantial contributions in political science by enriching our understandings of issue framing, theories of intersectionalism, public opinion, and a more accurate examination of women as political actors.

Methods & Data
This paper reports findings from an experiment. The experiment included randomly assigned treatments representing two issues women’s organizations have recently mobilized around: sexual harassment and the gender wage gap. The treatments were designed to imitate actual frames and policy solutions proposed by women’s organizations. The treatments then included five conditions (for each issue) that varied the framing according to different intersectional identities across class, race, and ethnicity. There was also a “control condition,” which included a policy frame that omitted all social identity indicators.

Three types of dependent variables were then included in the study and analyzed for this paper: support for gender-related policies, support for women’s political advocacy groups, perceived impact of the gender-related policies, and gender issue prioritization. Data came from a probability sample of 1000 women administered through Time Sharing Experiments for the Social Science (TESS).

This paper presents findings from an original experiment on the framing of women’s issues by political advocacy groups. The findings suggest that the identity framing of gender issues has a direct effect on women’s support for gender-related political advocacy groups as well as their support for policy initiatives towards sexual harassment and the gender wage gap.

References:
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing Theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10(1), 103–126.
Cohen, C. J. (1999). The Boundaries of Blackness: AIDS and the Breakdown of Black Politics. University of Chicago Press.
Collins, P. H. (1998). Intersections of Race, Class, Gender, and Nation: Some Implications for Black Family Studies. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 29(1), 27–36.
Crenshaw, K. (1997). Intersectionality and Identity Politics: Learning From Violence Against Women of Color. In M. L.
Gay, C., & Tate, K. (1998). Doubly Bound: The Impact of Gender and Race on the Politics of Black Women. Political Psychology, 19(1), 169–184.
Hancock, A.-M. (2007). When Multiplication Doesn’t Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, 5(1), 63–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592707070065
Rossi, A. S. (1985). Gender and the Life Course. Transaction Publishers.
Strolovitch, D. Z. (2006). Do Interest Groups Represent the Disadvantaged? Advocacy at the Intersections of Race, Class, and Gender. The Journal of Politics, 68(4), 894–910.
Winter, N. J. G. (2008). Dangerous Frames: How Ideas about Race and Gender Shape Public Opinion. University of Chicago Press.

Author

• Margaret Brower, University of Chicago